Factual Proffer — United States v. Marlin Jean (S.D. Fla.)
Summary
A factual proffer by the United States and defendant Marlin Jean in Case No. 22-CR-20018, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, entered on the docket 12/22/2022 as Document 43. It states that federal agents imaged Jean's phone during a secondary inspection on his return to the United States and found evidence that he used stolen personal information to open EDD unemployment insurance accounts in the names of approximately forty (40) individual victims. It states the EDD mailed prepaid BofA debit cards to drop sites, that an accomplice collected them for Jean, and that approximately $826,000 in UI funds was credited to those accounts. The phone also contained evidence of approximately fifty-three (53) other unauthorized access devices, and the parties agree the facts prove Counts 1 and 2.
Summary drafted by a model from the text of the original file linked on this page and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Cite this document
“Factual Proffer — United States v. Marlin Jean (S.D. Fla.).”
Original at ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/court-filing-usa-v-marlin-jean-dkt-43-s-d-fla-ad98b87c93/
, SHA-256 ab4b61b9403a7bee0857cb8f0a714e5b9abf38ecd5e70d94688eee6a624281d2.Full text
Case 1:22-cr-20018-RKA Document 43 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/22/2022 Page 1 of 4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SO UTH ERN D ISTR ICT O F FLO R IDA
CA SE N O .22-CR -20018-ALTM AN JR EID
IJNITED STATES OF AM ERICA
VS.
M AR I,IN JEAN ,
D efendant.
FA CT UA L PR O FFER
TheUnited StatesofAmerica(the lGunited States''),M ARLIN JEAN (theçr efendanf'),
ànd llislmdersigned cotmselagreethàt,werethiscasetoproceedto trial,theUnited Star
teswould
prove beyond a reasonable doubt the follow ing facts, am ong others, which occtlrred in the
Southelm DistrictofFloridaand
'elsewhere:
The federalgovernmentprovides une.
mylo'
ymentinsulande (ïçUIj,)benefits for
qualified peoplewho areunabletowork.State employm entofficesadmillistertheU1system for
thefederalgovernm ent;In California,theagencyresponsibleforoversightofthestate'sUIsystem
istheEmploymentDevelopnwntDejartment(ûGEDD'
1
').InM arch2020,throughtheCARESAct,
the federal governm entprovided stlbstantialU l funds to the statesto help the Americàn people
. .
during theekonom iccrisiscausedbytheCOVID-19pandemiç.Forthetimesrelevanttotlziscase;
theCaliforniaEDD disbursedU1benetksprimarilybyisstlingpre-paidBalzkofAmerica(&%ofA'')
debitcards,to provide easily accessibleU 1 assistance to eligible Califolmia U 1clailnants.
In 2021,Homeland Security lnvestiga
'tions (EGHS1'') agents began to develop
infonnation leadingthem to believethattheDefendantwasengaged in fraudulentactivities'.ln or
'arotm d Augtlst2021,they leained thathe w as traveling overseas and w as schedtlled to retul'
n to
Case 1:22-cr-20018-RKA Document 43 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/22/2022 Page 2 of 4
theUnitedStatesthàtsamemonth,tlu.oughMiamilntelmationalAirpol't(GçMIA?').
3. O n orabotltA ugust 15,2021,the H S1 agents and officers f'
rom U .S.Ctlstom sand
BorderProtection (;GCBP'')werepresentduringtheDefendant'san'ivalintoM IA,whereheand
llistravelcompanionswere refel-
red to secondal-y inspection,where they would be subjectto
inspectionsoftheicpersonsandtheirbelongings,priorto bçingadm itted intö theUnited States.
4. Dtuing that secondal'y inspection, the CBP agents lealmed that the D efendant's
travelcom pmzion was holding the Defendant'sphone,and the Defendantultim ately confirm ed
thatitwas indeed his phtme.Accordingly,pursuant to their border search powers as federal
Gicustom sofficersp''theH SIagents imaged theD efendant'sphönein orderto conductaforensic
search ofits contents.
M ostprom inently,the D efendant's phone data contained files dem onstrating the
Defendant's usq öfillegally obtained access devices and the personalidentifiable ilzfonzlation
(tT11'')andmeansofidentification ofotherindividuals,inordertofraudulently open California
EDD accountsinthennmesofapproximatelyforty(40)individualvictinp.
Specifically,thephone evidence revealedthat stal-ting in or around A ugust2021,
,
theDefendantf'
raudulently opened Califom iaEDD UIaccountsusingthesocialsecttritynumbers
(;(SSNs'')andPl1(e.g.,names,datesofbil-th)oftheindividualvictimsp'andthen causedthestate
agencytomailoutunauthorized BofA debitcards(pre-paid withUlftmds)tovariousresidential
addresses(tidrop sites'')throughoutSouth Florida. Stading ataroundthespmetime,chatsfrom
the D efendant's phone also show ed thatthe D efendant directed an accom plice nam ed GER .E.''to
coordinate the pick-ups ofEDD m ailings from the drop sites,and then to deliverthe mailings
(containingthepre-paidBofA debitcards)totheDefendant.
Case 1:22-cr-20018-RKA Document 43 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/22/2022 Page 3 of 4
7. Account,records provided by the California EDD and BofA confirmed thatthe
nam es and SSNS ofrealindividualvictim swere used to fraudulently ppen multiple California
EDD açcounts--often m ore than pne accotmtper victim .For example,during a stibsequent
intelwiew ,victim 4&T.R.''coizfinned thathe did notknow theDefendant,thathedid notatlthorize
' '
,
the D efendantto possessorusehisnam e,date ofbil-th,orSSN ,and thathehad nçvergiven anyone
.
, t
penuission to apply forUIbenefitstmderhisnam e.In total,Califom iaEDD recordsshowed that
approxim ately $826,000 in UIfundswerecreditedtothose accotlntsopenedinthenam eofthe40
individualsfound on theDèfendant'sphone,from in orarolm dAugust2020tltrough in orc ound
October2021.
t'
ln addition to the California EDD accounts'fraudulently opened in the name of
those approximately forty (40)individuals,theDefendmlt'yphone also contained evidence of
approximqtely fifty-three(53)otherunauthorized
,.accessdevices- c.g.,personalcreditcardsand
debitcardsfrom otherbalzks,personaland business checks,etc. belongirigto otheriùdividuals
andbusinessvictim s.
The parties'agree that D efendant's conduct w as in and affecting interstate
commerce,specitk ally,butnotlimited to,the aforem entioned ilw olvementofand effectofthis
fraud schem eon the CaliforniaEDD.
(THIS SECTION ISLEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK)
Case 1:22-cr-20018-RKA Document 43 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/22/2022 Page 4 of 4
10. The pârtiesf'tu4her'agreethatthese facts,which do notinclude al1factslcnowilto
the United States and the Defendant,are sufficientto prove Counts 1 and 2 ofihe lndictm ent
beyond a reasonable doubt.
JUAN ANTONIO GUYZALEZ
UNITED STATESATTORNEY
Date: Z *!M C'W- ày:
ED U ARD O G EA ,JR .
A SS T UN ITE STA TES A TTORN EY
!
Date:ljzllzz-- .
By: .
sz It (J(a1x s,BsQ.
R DSFENDA:T
oate:!&/=Jox. By: '
M AIU.IN AN
DEFENDM T
j
File and source
- File
- 43-factual-proffer-statement-as-to-marlin-jean.pdf
- Size
- 177,488 bytes
- SHA-256
- ab4b61b9403a7bee0857cb8f0a714e5b9abf38ecd5e70d94688eee6a624281d2
- Original
- PACER (login required)